Prosecutors no longer have the alleged cocaine, nor the video of the traffic stop, nor photos, nor a copy of the lab report.

By Frank Fernandezfrank.fernandez@news-jrnl.com

DAYTONA BEACH — Prosecutors no longer have the alleged cocaine, nor the video of the traffic stop, nor photos, nor a copy of the lab report, nor even the “brown bag with black socks and plastic bags,” (whatever that was for), and therefore they don’t have a case against a man being held on a drug charge dating back to 1993, a defense attorney said.All of it was destroyed. Kenold Antione, 54, has been held without bail since May at the Volusia County Branch Jail on a charge of trafficking in cocaine. But the cocaine in question was incinerated as part of routine evidence disposal in closed cases, said defense attorney James Dickson Crock, who added that the rest of the evidence was also discarded.“They destroyed every bit of evidence that they had,” Crock said in a phone interview. “They have none. They have zero. They destroyed everything.”R.J. Larizza’s 7th Circuit State Attorney’s Office would not provide a comment for this report Tuesday. Crock will ask Circuit Judge R. Michael Hutcheson in an Oct. 10 hearing to bar prosecutors from presenting any evidence about the cocaine to a jury because the evidence was destroyed.Presenting evidence that no longer exists would violate Antione’s Constitutional right to confront his accuser, because he could not have the alleged cocaine independently tested or confront and challenge witnesses, Crock said.“We don’t have the ability to challenge the primary evidence that’s being presented against my client,” Crock said.The case dates back to a year when Bill Clinton was president and the Dallas Cowboys beat the Buffalo Bills in the Super Bowl. A Volusia County sheriff’s deputy stopped the car Antione was driving on Nov. 18, 1993, and reported finding cocaine in a flowered bag on the floor by the passenger seat. Also arrested was a passenger, Noelvil Soirelus. Both men fled when the deputy was searching the bag, according to documents.Investigators did not find either Antione or Soirelus’ fingerprints on the bag, documents state. The same judge, Hutcheson, dismissed the charge back then. But the 5th District Court of Appeal in Daytona Beach reversed Hutcheson, ruling that it was up to a jury to decide whether either man knew about the cocaine. The court of appeal also ruled that the judge did not give sufficient consideration to the fact that both men had bolted. Antione didn’t wait for the jury either. Electronic court records indicate he didn’t show for trial in February 1996. Fast forward to March, 22, 2013, when Brevard County sheriff’s deputies cited a man named Marcel Mire on a charge of not having a vehicle registration. That man was actually Antoine, who has also used the alias of Beyard St. Jean. When the man did not show for a hearing, deputies started looking for him. Antione surrendered at the Brevard County jail on May 21. But the cocaine was incinerated on July 25, according to a motion filed by defense attorney Crock, who has represented Antione since the beginning in 1993. The other evidence was also destroyed.Volusia County Clerk of Court Diane Matousek sent a notice to prosecutors in November 2012 about plans to destroy the evidence in closed cases, including the one against Soirelus. Soirelus was sentenced in 1996 to 15 years in prison on a cocaine trafficking charge. Soirelus was released in 2002.But the evidence in the case against Soirelus is also the evidence against Antione. When the clerk’s office did not hear otherwise, the evidence was destroyed in July.Meanwhile Antione, a Haitian native, was sitting in the county jail, where, if and when he is released, he faces an immigration hold.Transcripts or testimony from the trial against Soirelus cannot be used against Antione, said Crock.“It’s not just a matter of law enforcement saying, ‘We think this guy’s guilty, so just trust us,” Crock said. “As far as I know that’s what they do over in Russia but not here.”Crock cited prior opinions to support his case, like this one in 1985 from the 4th District Court of Appeal in State versus Hill: “The State may not by the simple statement that they have lost the physical evidence prevent the exercise of the right (to confront witnesses) and then use the lost evidence against him.”Crock said the State Attorney’s Office should have someone keeping track of evidence. “They are responsible for prosecuting those cases,” Crock said. “So it’s not the clerk’s fault. It’s not the judge’s fault. It’s not my client’s fault. He’s in custody.”